After the successful 50 day answer writing practice for UPSC Civil Services mains under Clear IAS Mains High Value Answer Writing Test Series, it’s now time to start the full length test series for UPSC mains. We deeply appreciate the interest and enthusiasm shown by our regular participants and readers, which is the main motivating factor for us to come up with this free full length series. These mock tests for UPSC Mains can be taken from the comfort of home. We have already covered a full length test on GS1. On coming days, aspirants can expect free mock tests on GS3, GS4 and Essay.

Clear IAS Mains Full Length Free Mock Test Series – 2 (GS2)

Instructions: There are 25 questions. Each question should be attempted in 200 words and carries 10 marks each. Content is more important than the length.

Analyse the significance of Kesavananda Bharti case on the evolution of Indian Constitution and polity.

If there is a conflict between Fundamental Rights and DPSP, what will prevail? Trace the instances and court cases of conflict between Fundamental Rights and DPSP.

Governor being the agent of the center, to avoid policy deadlock, should resign whenever there is a change in administration at center. Critically evaluate this statement in the backdrop of recent issues surrounding Governor’s removal.

What are the schemes and projects for the development of Scheduled Tribes in India?

Poverty estimation of India is often criticized for various reasons. Critically analyse the findings of the latest poverty estimation by C Rangrajan committee.

Labour reforms are necessary for mass manufacturing, but at the same time the reforms should not result in labour exploitation. Explain in the backdrop of proposed labour reforms.

CBI handles anti-corruption, economic crimes, special crimes such as terrorism, bomb blasts, sensational homicides etc. But the issue of autonomy for CBI is still unsolved. Explain the issues related to CBI autonomy, along with court orders and progress made so far.

Pressure groups, even though they are not elected, are necessary evils in democracy. Critically evaluate.

India should draw lessons from the experience of other countries and move towards creation of Performance Based Organisations for public service delivery. Discuss the scope, in light of the 2nd administrative reforms commission report.

The relevant question of the protection of Whistleblowers is not well reflected in the Lokpal Act and Whistleblower Protection Act. Analyse.

Analyse if Jan Dhan Yojana can fix the problem of financial inclusion in India. How is PMJDY different from the earlier Financial Inclusion Plan – Swabhimaan?

Indian foreign policy towards United States can never be called consistent. Comment.

What is project Mausam? Analyze the possible effect of project Mausam to counter China’s influence.

Can India’s Act East policy be considered Look East Policy 2.0? Critically evaluate, explaining the changes in policy, if any.

Comment on the need for reforms in IMF. As an emerging super power, what is the significance of BRICS Bank and AIIB Bank to India?.

What is significance of Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA)? Why did India withdrew from signing TFA?

Israel being one of India’s major military sources, critically evaluate India’s stand on Israel-Palestine conflict.

How crucial are the relations with the two land locked countries in the Himalayas – Nepal and Bhutan – for India in the 21st century? Critically assess the possibilities.

The landmark 2005 civil nuclear deal between India and US is still in limbo. What are the major hindrances to the implementation of the deal? What are the steps taken by both countries to make the deal practical?

What's trending in ClearIAS?

ClearIAS.com provides free IAS online coaching, guidance, strategies, books, online study-materials and mock tests with a vision that no candidate should be left out of UPSC exam competition due to in-accessibility of expensive IAS classroom coaching. We write simple, easy to understand articles, but always ensure high standards of quality. Rated among the best, emerging online test preparation startups, Clear IAS also offers for free, the popular Clear IAS android app.

Part 3 , article no 12 to 35 Contains Fundamental Rights of every single citizen of India , other hand part 4 article no 36 to 51 talks about DPSP which marks as an instruction and duty of every Indian state.
the justiciability of Fundamental Rights and Non- justiciability of DPSP led to conflict between both since the inception of Constitution of India. As mentioned in Part 4 article 37 of the indian constitution , DPSP are non justiciable in nature. In regards of this the supreme Court and Parliament both have argued many times and Results were different each the time , which can be seen by below Cases.

the Champakam Dorairajan Case 1951 : this case was the first case of conflict between Fundamental rights and DPSP in supreme court , on the issue of Reservation. article 16 (2) of Indian fundamental rights says , there should be no Discrimination on the ground of sex, caste , descent , place of birth in regards of any office and employment under state. on other hand Article no 46 from chapter DPSP clearly mentioned that a state should promote the weaker section of the society specially Scheduled tribe , scheduled caste by providing Education and Employment opportunity
the supreme court ruled that in case of Conflict between Fundamental rights and DPSP , the former would prevail. it declared that the directive principles have to conform and run as subsidiary of the fundamental rights. this means the fundamental rights were given more priority over directive principles of state policy.

Golaknath Case : In this case the bench of 11 judges of SC was formed first time and supreme court ruled that Fundamental rights can not be amended for implementation of DPSP. the parliament reacted to supreme court’s judgement by enacting 24 amendment act 1971. this amendment clears that Parliament has power to make any amendment including Fundamental rights.

Kesavananda Bharti Case : In this case SC declared that parliament could amend fundamental rights but could not destroy the ‘basic structure ‘ of the fundamental rights.
Minerva mill Case : Supreme court Directed that The fundamental rights and DPSP are equal and has equal responsibilities to carry out the law . giving the primacy to one over another will disturb the harmony of Constitution

the parliament can amend fundamental right for implementation of DPSP so long the amendment does not damage the basic structure of the Constitution.